If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

It is absurd that we are capable of witnessing a 40,000 year old system of gender oppression begin to dissolve before our eyes yet still see the abolition of a 200 year old economic system as an unrealistic utopia.

What if you hate weed (with a passion) but want to see it legalised and desperately seek to improve life for the poor but at the same time you consider yourself fiscally conservative?
Genuinely interested.

What if you hate weed (with a passion) but want to see it legalised and desperately seek to improve life for the poor but at the same time you consider yourself fiscally conservative?
Genuinely interested.

You stay out of politics, tbh.

Originally Posted by Narmio

Welcome to Dwarf Fortress, where there is a fine line between insanity and gameplay. The line menaces with spikes of obsessive compulsion.

"I think the government should spend money on infrastructure rather than aircraft carriers"
"I think the government has a duty to make their best effort to ensure that everyone gets fair opportunities, even if they're not the same sexuality/gender as keckers"
"Rich people should pay a greater share of their income in taxation than poor people, and all non-personal property should be considered potentially taxable"

What if you hate weed (with a passion) but want to see it legalised and desperately seek to improve life for the poor but at the same time you consider yourself fiscally conservative?
Genuinely interested.

then you've got no idea how society's economic framework functions, being fiscally conservative means lowering government spending and taxation while improving life for the poor implies significant wealth transfers from rich to poor that, in reality, can only happen trough taxation.

you want to have and eat the cake at the same time, this is not practically possible.

"I think the government should spend money on infrastructure rather than aircraft carriers"
"I think the government has a duty to make their best effort to ensure that everyone gets fair opportunities, even if they're not the same sexuality/gender as keckers"
"Rich people should pay a greater share of their income in taxation than poor people, and all non-personal property should be considered potentially taxable"

congratulations, you're a social liberal, now carry your reasoning to the end and see why a market economy can't actually ever reasonably deliver on any of that, pro-tip, Money = Power.

What if you hate weed (with a passion) but want to see it legalised and desperately seek to improve life for the poor but at the same time you consider yourself fiscally conservative?
Genuinely interested.

then you've got no idea how society's economic framework functions, being fiscally conservative means lowering government spending and taxation while improving life for the poor implies significant wealth transfers from rich to poor that, in reality, can only happen trough taxation.

you want to have and eat the cake at the same time, this is not practically possible.

"I think the government should spend money on infrastructure rather than aircraft carriers"
"I think the government has a duty to make their best effort to ensure that everyone gets fair opportunities, even if they're not the same sexuality/gender as keckers"
"Rich people should pay a greater share of their income in taxation than poor people, and all non-personal property should be considered potentially taxable"

congratulations, you're a social liberal, now carry your reasoning to the end and see why a market economy can't actually ever reasonably deliver on any of that, pro-tip, Money = Power.

It makes me laugh every time someone says that, when there are multiple Nordic examples of it working.

What if you hate weed (with a passion) but want to see it legalised and desperately seek to improve life for the poor but at the same time you consider yourself fiscally conservative?
Genuinely interested.

then you've got no idea how society's economic framework functions, being fiscally conservative means lowering government spending and taxation while improving life for the poor implies significant wealth transfers from rich to poor that, in reality, can only happen trough taxation.

you want to have and eat the cake at the same time, this is not practically possible.

"I think the government should spend money on infrastructure rather than aircraft carriers"
"I think the government has a duty to make their best effort to ensure that everyone gets fair opportunities, even if they're not the same sexuality/gender as keckers"
"Rich people should pay a greater share of their income in taxation than poor people, and all non-personal property should be considered potentially taxable"

congratulations, you're a social liberal, now carry your reasoning to the end and see why a market economy can't actually ever reasonably deliver on any of that, pro-tip, Money = Power.

I'm not averse to raising taxation, my views have changed in relation to that.

So what am I? Genuinely interested as you seem to know far more about this than I.

he doesn't

No, what Liare is saying is exactly what fiscally conservative means these days, blame whoever you wish but thsts how it seems to be. Maybe let's quickly describe positions instead of using handy labels that get changed for random purposes every few years.

So what am I? Genuinely interested as you seem to know far more about this than I.

he doesn't

No, what Liare is saying is exactly what fiscally conservative means these days, blame whoever you wish but thsts how it seems to be. Maybe let's quickly describe positions instead of using handy labels that get changed for random purposes every few years.